The following article was written by Mikel Delagrange, Senior International Legal Advisor at the Wayamo Foundation and Mark Kersten, Senior Consultant at the Wayamo Foundation and the founder of Justice in Conflict

Experts call it the worst humanitarian crisis currently facing the world. Still, no accountability for mass atrocities has been delivered.

More people than the combined populations of Ireland and Switzerland have been forced to flee their homes and communities. But no one has been held to account.

Despite reports of massacres leaving pools of blood that could be seen from space, the perpetrators still roam free.

What will it take for the people of Sudan, faced with a relentless stream of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocidal violence, to finally see the architects of this violence held to account? 

The answer could very well lie not at any international court or tribunal, but in a regional neighbour: Kenya. In June of this year, a criminal complaint was filed in Nairobi by Legal Action Worldwide and the African Center for Justice and Peace Studies on behalf of twelve victims of atrocities committed by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan. The victims alleged that the RSF unlawfully detained, tortured, and raped them – and murdered their family members. These are crimes against humanity and war crimes, and the victims are demanding that Kenyan authorities investigate and prosecute the RSF fighters responsible. It is now up to Kenya’s governing authorities to decide if they will open an investigation and, in doing so, contribute to justice for the people of Sudan. We hope that they will.

For the last three years, the NGO we work for, the Wayamo Foundation, has been laying the groundwork for this moment, spurred by a conviction that international crimes affect us all and can therefore be tried anywhere. We have seen how African states, including Kenya, have the expertise and capacity to address international crimes committed in its neighbourhood – including in Sudan. The case against RSF fighters is a critical first step towards that goal, and certainly not the last. 

Why Kenya, some may ask? 

First, the country has the laws and expertise to prosecute international crimes committed outside of its borders. Under the 2008 International Crimes Act, section 8(1)(C), Kenyan authorities can exercise universal jurisdiction, allowing them to investigate and prosecute foreign atrocity perpetrators even when their crimes were committed outside of Kenya against foreigners. The critical requirement is presence: the Act applies so long as the perpetrators are on Kenyan soil. The country also has the right people – investigators, prosecutors, and judges – to do this work. We know because we’ve been working with them for years.

Second, Kenya is home to thousands of Sudanese refugees, including those who fled atrocities committed by the RSF. This is not merely a matter of moral standing — it is an investigative asset. The Al-Khatib trial in the Germany city of Koblenz, the first successful universal jurisdiction prosecution of Syrian state officials for crimes against humanity, was built on precisely this foundation: a diaspora community that could identify perpetrators, describe command structures, and testify to crimes that no domestic court could reach. East Africa now stands in the same relationship to Sudan as Germany stood in relation to Syria — host to a displaced population that carries both the memory of atrocities and the evidence needed to prosecute them. The conditions for a sustained regional docket of cases are already present. The question is whether Kenya will be the first to use them.

Third, Kenya has become a safe haven for the RSF establishment. Multiple reports indicate that not only do RSF leaders and their families openly reside in the country, but that Nairobi has provided them with both diplomatic cover and citizenship. That may be changing as a result of external pressures to expel the RSF, but many remain in the country.

The presence in Kenya of relevant laws and domestic legal capacity, Sudanese victims and witnesses, and the presence of RSF commanders implicated in atrocity crimes represent a trifecta of opportunity for Kenya to demonstrate its leadership on good governance, stability and the rule of law. 

Having RSF elements in Kenyan society is destabilizing and has already resulted in simmering tension both in the regionand internationally. By prosecuting even mid-level perpetrators, Nairobi could set a precedent and contribute meaningfully to justice and accountability in Sudan. 

Some may argue that prosecuting Sudanese war crimes within Kenyan courts under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction violates the sacred African Union (AU) principle of non-interference enshrined in Article 4(g) of the AU’s Constitutive Act. However, this traditional defense of state sovereignty is superseded by the AU’s own doctrine of non-indifference under Article 4(h). Given that the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights Fact-Finding Mission has formally documented that the atrocities in Sudan have crossed the threshold into war crimes and crimes against humanity, the continental mandate to protect human life overrides the shield of domestic jurisdiction. 

Furthermore, the case for absolute non-interference collapses in the face of a conflict that has already breached Kenya’s borders. The spillover of the war—manifested by thousands of refugees seeking humanitarian shelter and, conversely, sanctioned war financiers and commanders exploiting Nairobi to establish parallel political entities and launder illicit assets through local businesses—represents a profound, unilateral interference into Kenya’s domestic security and sovereignty. Pursuing judicial accountability is therefore not an act of external meddling, but a legitimate exercise of sovereign self-defense and continental legal obligation.

By delivering a modicum of accountability for Sudanese victims and survivors, Nairobi could achieve multiple goals. First, it would speak to those who see Kenya as a place of refuge, announcing to them: we believe you, we care about what happened to you, and we will work to hold those who harmed you accountable. 

Second, prosecuting perpetrators would serve public safety. War criminals and torturers don’t suddenly become angels when they arrive in new countries; many will be involved in corruption and organized crime. 

Third, holding perpetrators responsible will signal that Kenya is a regional leader on justice and accountability committed to ending a cycle of war and atrocity in the region, and earn Nairobi a reputation that could yield political and economic dividends.

Kenyan efforts to address atrocities in Sudan would give victims and survivors of the RSF what too few have offered them: a hearing. As one victim involved in the criminal complaint says: “With this filing, I have had my voice heard and drawn the attention of the region and the international community to the horrific human rights violations being perpetrated against civilians in Sudan. I hope this will help bring an end to impunity.”

Kenyan President William Ruto has spoken repeatedly on the war in Sudan. In May 2026, he declared that those responsible for the war, including the RSF leadership, “have no regard for human life. All levers need to be pulled, regionally and globally, to stop the carnage and the human suffering in the Sudan.”

Kenya has a lever that it can pull to help stop the carnage and suffering in Sudan: prosecute those responsible for it.